The Urgent Need for Fair Rules in a Strategic Market

Critical minerals such as lithium, cobalt, nickel, and rare earth elements have become the lifeblood of modern technology — powering electric vehicles, wind turbines, smartphones, and defense systems.

Yet, the supply of these minerals is increasingly concentrated in the hands of a few nations, particularly China, which refines over 90% of rare earths and dominates the processing of lithium and graphite as well.

This concentration poses a serious threat to economic stability, environmental sustainability, and national security. The world has already seen how monopolistic control can be used for geopolitical leverage — most notably when China restricted rare earth exports to Japan in 2010.

To prevent similar future crises, the global community must design trade, investment, and environmental regulations that ensure fair access, transparency, and sustainable development of critical minerals.

This means balancing free-market principles with strategic safeguards against resource nationalism and corporate monopolization.

1. Strengthening International Trade Rules under the WTO Framework

The World Trade Organization (WTO) remains the most influential global institution governing trade. Although its rules were created before the era of critical minerals, they can still serve as a powerful tool against monopolistic behavior.

a. Prohibiting Export Bans and Quotas

The WTO’s General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) prohibits export restrictions that distort global supply chains. In 2014, for instance, China lost a WTO dispute after imposing export quotas on rare earths, tungsten, and molybdenum — a move that artificially inflated global prices and strengthened its industrial advantage.

To prevent future abuses, WTO members could:

• Expand current trade rules to specifically cover critical minerals and processing stages, not just raw materials.

• Establish an early-warning mechanism to flag export controls or pricing manipulation.

• Introduce penalties for strategic hoarding, similar to anti-dumping measures used in other industries.

b. Transparency in State Subsidies and Industrial Policy

Many countries, including China, provide massive state subsidies to mining and refining industries, giving them an unfair global advantage. The WTO could require all member states to disclose subsidies related to critical minerals, ensuring fair competition and discouraging predatory pricing.

c. Promoting “Open Access” Mineral Markets

The WTO could coordinate with the OECD and G20 to develop a “Critical Minerals Access Charter,” ensuring open markets, responsible sourcing, and fair trade conditions. This would prevent any single country or cartel from dominating global supply chains.

2. The Role of Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs)

Beyond trade, environmental regulation plays a crucial role. Critical mineral production often causes pollution, deforestation, and toxic waste — problems that China initially ignored while building its monopoly. A fair global system must ensure that competition does not come at the cost of the planet’s health.

a. Enforcing Environmental Standards in Mining and Refining

Organizations such as the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the International Resource Panel (IRP) could set global sustainability benchmarks for extraction and refining. These would include:

• Limits on radioactive waste discharge.

• Water use and tailings management standards.

• Carbon emissions thresholds.

• Community consultation and land restoration requirements.

Countries meeting these standards could gain “Green Mineral Certification”, giving them a competitive edge in markets that value ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) compliance.

b. Linking Environmental Rules with Trade Access

The Paris Agreement and emerging climate trade mechanisms (like the EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism) could extend to minerals. Exporters with poor environmental records would face tariffs, while clean producers receive incentives — pushing global players toward sustainable practices.

c. Preventing “Environmental Dumping”

Some monopolies thrive because they cut costs by violating environmental laws. A global agreement could introduce penalties for environmental dumping — where countries lower ecological standards to gain mining advantage — thus leveling the playing field for ethical producers.

3. Creating a Global Critical Minerals Governance Framework

The world lacks a coordinated institution focused exclusively on critical minerals. To prevent monopolies, there is growing support for creating a Global Critical Minerals Council (GCMC) or similar intergovernmental body.

a. Mandate and Functions

Such a body could:

• Map global reserves and production capacity to ensure transparency.

• Monitor supply chain concentration and issue annual risk assessments.

• Facilitate technology sharing for clean refining and recycling.

• Coordinate emergency stockpiles and supply diversification.

The GCMC could operate under the umbrella of the UN, G20, or OECD, ensuring universal participation.

b. Model: The IEA’s Role in Oil Markets

The International Energy Agency (IEA) manages global oil data and strategic petroleum reserves. A similar system could apply to minerals, where members commit to mutual assistance during supply disruptions.

This would ensure no single country can paralyze the global economy by cutting off access to key resources.

4. Encouraging Ethical and Transparent Supply Chains

Transparency and traceability are key tools against monopolistic and exploitative practices.

a. Expanding the “Conflict Minerals” Model

The U.S. Dodd-Frank Act (Section 1502) requires companies to disclose if their tin, tungsten, tantalum, or gold come from conflict zones. A new version could extend this framework to lithium, cobalt, and rare earths, requiring full disclosure of origin and refining source.

This would encourage companies to diversify supply chains away from any one dominant country.

b. Blockchain-Based Traceability

Using blockchain and digital tracking systems, international regulators could follow each batch of critical minerals from mine to market. This makes it harder for monopolies or illegal refiners to manipulate data or conceal environmentally harmful practices.

c. Global Corporate Accountability Standards

Institutions like the OECD and World Bank could mandate that firms receiving development or export financing follow Responsible Mining Guidelines — ensuring ethical sourcing and fair labor conditions throughout the supply chain.

5. Supporting Developing Nations in Building Refining Capacity

Preventing monopoly isn’t only about restraining dominant players — it’s about empowering others. Many developing regions, especially Africa, South America, and Southeast Asia, have vast reserves of critical minerals but lack refining and technological infrastructure.

a. Financing Diversification

The World Bank, IMF, and African Development Bank could create a Critical Minerals Development Fund to support refining projects, sustainable mining zones, and local value addition.

b. Technology Transfer and Training

High-income countries and institutions should share processing technologies and environmental management systems to help emerging economies compete fairly.

c. South–South Cooperation

Regional alliances — such as between Africa and Latin America — could promote cooperative refining, joint research, and shared trade infrastructure, reducing dependence on China or Western intermediaries.

6. Strategic Stockpiles and Market Stabilization Mechanisms

Monopolies thrive on scarcity and volatility. To counteract that, global mechanisms can help stabilize prices and ensure supply security.

• International Stockpiles: Countries could contribute to shared reserves managed by the GCMC or IEA, guaranteeing emergency access.

• Price Stabilization Funds: Similar to agricultural commodity agreements, a stabilization fund could prevent price manipulation by dominant refiners.

• Diversified Long-Term Contracts: Encouraging long-term, transparent supply agreements across regions can reduce market shocks and speculative manipulation.

7. National Regulations Supporting Global Goals

Global action requires strong domestic laws. Governments should:

• Prohibit foreign monopolies from controlling domestic mines.

• Require local refining or processing before export.

• Enforce antitrust laws against market-dominant corporations.

• Promote public-private partnerships for sustainable exploration and recycling.

National laws aligned with global standards can collectively build a multipolar mineral economy.

Toward a Fair and Sustainable Mineral Future

The world is entering an era where minerals define power as much as oil once did. If current trends continue, critical mineral monopolies—especially in refining—could determine the fate of industries, militaries, and economies.

Preventing such monopolization requires a blend of trade transparency, environmental responsibility, and collective governance. Global institutions must evolve to regulate not just trade in goods but the entire industrial ecosystems that shape access to resources.

By strengthening WTO rules, building new governance bodies, enforcing environmental standards, and empowering developing nations to climb the value chain, the international community can ensure that critical minerals remain a shared global good, not a weapon of leverage.

The choice is clear: either let monopolies dictate the future of technology, or build a system where resources serve humanity, not hegemony.